Fixed.
I read Keith's autobiography. He said him and Paul had a conversation recently, which is like five years ago, but somewhat recent compare to their "prime years." They both agreed that The Beatles were a more vocal band. They had two very good lead singers, Plus George and Ringo weren't too shabby either.
The Stones on the other hand, were musicians. They had one lead singer, but the band could play. They were also more raw. The Beatles were more innovative, but The Stones didn't have to be. They were old fashioned rock and roll. Rock, blues, country. They did it all, and did it well.